It is sickening. We are being reduced to nothing more than a revenue stream. Laws are written for no reason other than to raise revenue, and the police are existing to do nothing but suck out as much money as possible out of people.

It is sickening. We are being reduced to nothing more than a revenue stream. Laws are written for no reason other than to raise revenue, and the police are existing to do nothing but suck out as much money as possible out of people.

Your attitude has officially hit the 'disturbing' level (you could use a multitude of adjectives as a substitute for 'disturbing' and be accurate).

This one's a homerun:

Police are existing to do nothing but suck out as much money as possible out of people.

Exactly how were the officers in New Brunswick trying to suck money out of people when they were gunned down by a freedom/rights activist idiot carrying his assault rifle through residential streets?

This argument is not even an argument. It's become a petty discussion with one side patiently speaking reason to another side that is nothing short of petulant. The side that is speaking reason to the other side is losing patience.

Keep posting your outliers to affirm your beliefs, however... at some point acknowledge that for every one of the absurd events you post... there are countless- fucking countless- examples of good police work you fail to acknowledge. Do you actually think society could exist without police work?

Oh yeah... don't forget to pat yourself on the back for the stoic, heroic, and exemplary work you do on a daily basis that the rest of society values infinitely more than police and legal work!

"Once again, the police officer with the megaphone ordered the protesters to go home. "We're in our yard!" they responded. At one point West walked to his fence with his hands high up in the air. "This my property! This my property!" he shouted, prompting police to fire a tear gas canister directly at his face."

It is sickening. We are being reduced to nothing more than a revenue stream. Laws are written for no reason other than to raise revenue, and the police are existing to do nothing but suck out as much money as possible out of people.

Your attitude has officially hit the 'disturbing' level (you could use a multitude of adjectives as a substitute for 'disturbing' and be accurate).

This one's a homerun:

Police are existing to do nothing but suck out as much money as possible out of people.

Exactly how were the officers in New Brunswick trying to suck money out of people when they were gunned down by a freedom/rights activist idiot carrying his assault rifle through residential streets?

This argument is not even an argument. It's become a petty discussion with one side patiently speaking reason to another side that is nothing short of petulant. The side that is speaking reason to the other side is losing patience.

Keep posting your outliers to affirm your beliefs, however... at some point acknowledge that for every one of the absurd events you post... there are countless- fucking countless- examples of good police work you fail to acknowledge. Do you actually think society could exist without police work?

Oh yeah... don't forget to pat yourself on the back for the stoic, heroic, and exemplary work you do on a daily basis that the rest of society values infinitely more than police and legal work!

Keep apologizing for the corrupt costumed gang that enforces laws designed to raise revenue.

I do not advocate for violence from anyone, from either side. Your dramatization is uncalled for.

I will say that the ratio of police that violate some level of civil rights of the civilians in this country is changing for the worse. Is it 51% of the police force? I don't know. I do insist that a good cop that turns a blind eye to these violations is just as guilty as those that commit them.

Of course. I don't think any one would dispute that last statement.

But you've also got to be aware of the fact that there are literally hundreds of thousands of police contacts that occur on a daily basis where cops do something that doesn't constitute "police abuse" (i.e. make an arrest of a violent offender, enforce the law, assist in emergencies, issue tickets, issue warnings, assist someone in need, etc etc etc).

My point is that if the above is true (it is), then it becomes virtually impossible to believe that a handful of incidents where cops outright violate the law, unjustifiably kill someone etc means there is a growing trend of officers who violate some level of civil rights etc. If there are hundreds of thousands of police/citizen contacts every day, then how could a handful of bad incidents ever mean a majority of cops are bad?

And also, lets clarify terms: when an officer makes an arrest that is later found by a judge to be lacking, say, probable cause, that doesn't mean the officer is somehow a "bad" cop (at least in the sense that I think you mean the term; i.e. corrupt, vicious, aggressive etc). Cops are people too and hence, make mistakes. Sometimes officers make an arrest believing they have probable cause, only to find out later that the law says they didn't. That doesn't mean they're a bad cop; it means they made a mistake.

So when we talk about "abuse," I think it's fair to say we're talking about cops who kill people, use excessive force etc. The real question in the information age is whether the bad instances you're pointing out are actually happening more frequently, or whether there is simply more reporting of the instances that do occur.

I think you're rightly upset about any reported abuse stories out there involving cops. Good citizens should be. But I also think you're taking that outrage and trying to make a broader claim about ALL cops, a claim for which there just isn't evidence.

I will say that the ratio of police that violate some level of civil rights of the civilians in this country is changing for the worse. Is it 51% of the police force? I don't know. I do insist that a good cop that turns a blind eye to these violations is just as guilty as those that commit them.

Of course. I don't think any one would dispute that last statement.

But you've also got to be aware of the fact that there are literally hundreds of thousands of police contacts that occur on a daily basis where cops do something that doesn't constitute "police abuse" (i.e. make an arrest of a violent offender, enforce the law, assist in emergencies, issue tickets, issue warnings, assist someone in need, etc etc etc).

My point is that if the above is true (it is), then it becomes virtually impossible to believe that a handful of incidents where cops outright violate the law, unjustifiably kill someone etc means there is a growing trend of officers who violate some level of civil rights etc. If there are hundreds of thousands of police/citizen contacts every day, then how could a handful of bad incidents ever mean a majority of cops are bad?

And also, lets clarify terms: when an officer makes an arrest that is later found by a judge to be lacking, say, probable cause, that doesn't mean the officer is somehow a "bad" cop (at least in the sense that I think you mean the term; i.e. corrupt, vicious, aggressive etc). Cops are people too and hence, make mistakes. Sometimes officers make an arrest believing they have probable cause, only to find out later that the law says they didn't. That doesn't mean they're a bad cop; it means they made a mistake.

So when we talk about "abuse," I think it's fair to say we're talking about cops who kill people, use excessive force etc. The real question in the information age is whether the bad instances you're pointing out are actually happening more frequently, or whether there is simply more reporting of the instances that do occur.

I think you're rightly upset about any reported abuse stories out there involving cops. Good citizens should be. But I also think you're taking that outrage and trying to make a broader claim about ALL cops, a claim for which there just isn't evidence.

I have never said it is all cops, I know many that are good people. I also know many that are not.

The discussion on previous pages was why is this becoming more evident. Do you really believe that because of the internet more of these abuses exist? Was there not enough technology to let the world know about the Rodney King beating?

I believe the internet does certainly contribute to more cases being shared which is a good thing. Abusive police need to be put on notice and they need to be stopped. Not only are they hurting innocent people but they are giving the good guys a bad name. We can disagree but I believe that we are trending towards a police state, as recent events compel me to come to that conclusion.

I also believe the militarization of the local police drastically increases civil rights abuses of the public.

I have never said it is all cops, I know many that are good people. I also know many that are not.

The discussion on previous pages was why is this becoming more evident. Do you really believe that because of the internet more of these abuses exist? Was there not enough technology to let the world know about the Rodney King beating?

I believe the internet does certainly contribute to more cases being shared which is a good thing. Abusive police need to be put on notice and they need to be stopped. Not only are they hurting innocent people but they are giving the good guys a bad name. We can disagree but I believe that we are trending towards a police state, as recent events compel me to come to that conclusion.

I also believe the militarization of the local police drastically increases civil rights abuses of the public.

And nobody has said all cops are good.

The problem, Unsung, is your 'balance'. As Van pointed out... there are countless good cops doing good things every day. In every post you have written, if it wasn't clearly stated it was implied that a really significant portion of cops are brutal (like your 'young cops' post). This... is not true.

There always will be bad cops doing bad things, but these are the exceptions to the norm. We cannot condemn every police officer for the 'bad eggs' that perform poorly... just as we cannot condemn every teacher as a pedophile for the 'bad eggs' that act inappropriately.

I have never said it is all cops, I know many that are good people. I also know many that are not.

The discussion on previous pages was why is this becoming more evident. Do you really believe that because of the internet more of these abuses exist? Was there not enough technology to let the world know about the Rodney King beating?

I believe the internet does certainly contribute to more cases being shared which is a good thing. Abusive police need to be put on notice and they need to be stopped. Not only are they hurting innocent people but they are giving the good guys a bad name. We can disagree but I believe that we are trending towards a police state, as recent events compel me to come to that conclusion.

I also believe the militarization of the local police drastically increases civil rights abuses of the public.

I guess this is my concern. You believe we are trending toward a police state, and have stated that you believe a majority of "young cops" are bad. You're citing individual instances where police officers do bad things as evidence. I'm challenging your statement about cops by pointing out the hundreds of thousands of instances that occur every day where there isn't police abuse. It simply can't be true that a handful of incidents where cops - young or old - do bad things means some subset of cops is in large part "bad."

I agree reporting and information of abuse is generally a great thing. I do wonder whether, in the advent of 24-hour news, the internet, and the speed of which things are reported, transmitted and retransmitted, whether or not we're hearing more stories, or just the same stories more frequently.

Ultimately, I think you've made up your mind about cops and are trying to find evidence that supports that opinion. That's fine, but just understand there's a lot of evidence that suggests your opinion isn't accurate, or at the very least, that your argument as stated is illogical. (e.g. some cops do bad things so therefore a majority of cops do bad things).

You want me to go around posting stories of cops that actually do their jobs and not abuse people? Do you get a bonus every day because you do your job correctly?

Besides if "my balance" is off then perhaps the police need to tone it down a few notches.

No one's asking you to do anything and no one expects medals for cops who don't commit abuse. But also understand that you've made a very broad claim about cops, namely that a "majority of cops are bad"/"there's a trend toward bad cops" etc. All I've tried to do is point out why your conclusion is not supported by your evidence. Claiming a majority of cops are bad because some cops do bad things is illogical, at least without a lot more evidence and numbers.

I'm not going to keep quoting but you are sort of making it sound like these violations are infrequent, and I don't believe that they are.

And again the problem with just one violation can cause a ripple effect, lives get ruined. Not too many groups of people can probably do as much damage as a police force when they abuse their roles.

So in conclusion I point out misdeeds, because the "mistakes" that police make are often with severe consequences.

Again, they are "infrequent" insofar as there are far more instances of non-abuse.

No one is doubting that when cops commit abuse (like murder, brutality etc) lives are changed and ruined. That's not the issue.

You've made a broad claim that a majority of cops are bad OR that there's a trend toward cops committing abuse. You've cited individual instances of abuse as support for that claim. That is an unsupported conclusion without also providing evidence that a majority of police contacts end with police abuse, that more abuse is actually happening and not just reported more frequently etc.

There are certainly less violations than non-violations based on interactions, I don't recall saying the opposite. My point is that I believe the violations are becoming more frequent than say 50 years ago.

FWIW, my statement about trending that you keep citing was concerning how the police have been becoming more militaristic and the violations becoming more frequent. It had nothing to do with percentages of good/bad cop. Frequencies can increase and still not hit the majority.

There are certainly less violations than non-violations based on interactions, I don't recall saying the opposite. My point is that I believe the violations are becoming more frequent than say 50 years ago.

FWIW, my statement about trending that you keep citing was concerning how the police have been becoming more militaristic and the violations becoming more frequent. It had nothing to do with percentages of good/bad cop. Frequencies can increase and still not hit the majority.

I gtg, everyone stay safe.

Well, that's typically what a statement about a majority might mean, and you did use the phrasing about good vs. bad (in response to my original question), but I digress. Glad we could clarify it. Take care.

We had a really sad day in and around Dallas yesterday and the day before. A teenager shot and killed both his parents. Another teenager stabbed three family members (all are expected to recover) before being shot and killed by the police. A man was shot on the street by the police after he was harassing people on the street and tried to climb in a minivan with a family.

Last but not least, a man with apparent anti government views started a fire in a very upscale neighborhood, called the fire department, then began shooting at them. He also called the police, falsely reporting a kidnapping, then shot at them when they arrived. The SWAT team came and he surrendered without anyone being hurt.

It is depressing how much violence there is in our society these days. Generally hostile and angry "news" commentators whipping up hatred and people inciting hatred against the police and the government are not doing anyone any favors. Sure there are bad cops, but there are good ones, too, who outweigh the bad ones. Generalizing about any group of people is not helpful

Looting and unrest has rocked the neighborhood in the days following Brown's death. At least four people, including two police officers, have been hurt and 47 arrested in the aftermath of the shooting, according to St. Louis' KMOV.

what a suprise...looting, who-da-thunk-it ? anything for a free t.v or a pair air jordans right ?

Godfather.

it dosen't matter to me what a man dose for a living you understand..
as long as his interest's don't conflict with mine.

NYPD urged to step up body-worn camera pilot after chokehold deathAmid accusations of excessive force and increasing civilian video of police activity, New York officers may wear cameras while on duty

The most cited study of the effects of body-worn cameras on policing is Cambridge University’s examination of the police department in Rialto, California. After cameras were introduced in February 2012, officers’ use of force dropped 59%, and complaints against officers plummeted by 88%.